The doctrine of consideration has been a source of much discussion over the years. In 1937, the doctrine of consideration was under review by the English Law Revision Committee. They suggested that "the inconvenience and possible injustice resulting from the doctrine of consideration raise the question whether it presents countervailing disadvantages which justify its retention." Furthermore they acknowledged that the French Civil Code finds 'cause' as the important component in a contract. In Germany, the law looks at the 'intention' of the parties that make up the contract. Both societies do not recognise the doctrine of consideration, yet they are both highly developed legal systems, and they operate without the difficulties that our society experiences with the doctrine of consideration. They also acknowledged that, even though there was much support for the abolition of this doctrine, it was "so deeply embedded in...law that any measure which proposed to do away with it altogether would almost certainly arouse suspicion and hostility." The English Law Revision Committee therefore suggested amending the doctrine to eliminate those aspects which may cause both hardship and unnecessary inconvenience. The committee believed that this was a crucial course of action for the doctrine of consideration to prevent hardship and unnecessary inconvenience. The recommendations made by the committee were not enacted by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The courts have, by decisions made on particular cases, made an effort to apply the recommendations made by the committee to reduce the hardship and unnecessary inconvenience that the doctrine of consideration may cause. Cases such as Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Pty Ltd , Trident General Insurance Co Ltd v McNiece Bros Pty Ltd , and Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v
             Maher are some cases that the courts have used a...